[speechlesstx]

Better than it was when Bush left.

Carville: 2012 could be ‘very rough’ for Obama, says civil unrest ‘imminently possible’

[excon]

Hello again, Steve:

Ahhhh... a he said, she said, huh?? Well, OBVIOUSLY, the liberal is telling the truth.

excon

[excon]

'very rough' for Obama, says civil unrest 'imminently possible'

Hello again, Steve:

Obama is BUSH on steroids. Carville looks like Mr. Magoo but he's RIGHT. Anti-war demonstrations are kicking up here in the Emerald City. They're going to spread... I'm old and creaky, but I'm joining up. It's my last chance to relive the 60's...

Whhhoooooeeeee!

excon

[speechlesstx]

Nah, Carville looks like Gollum.

[speechlesstx]

More Details Emerge in Wisconsin’s ‘Chokegate’
June 28, 2011 11:42 A.M.
By Christian Schneider

With the Wisconsin Supreme Court devolving into a storyline only Vince McMahon could love, rumors are still swirling about what actually happened when two justices engaged in a physical confrontation behind closed doors on June 13. Justice Ann Walsh Bradley claims Justice David Prosser “choked” her. Prosser denies he choked Bradley, and claims she initiated physical contact. In the past two days, multiple sources with first-hand knowledge of the incident have been able to provide more details as to what exactly happened behind closed chamber doors.

The week before the legislature was set to re-pass the collective-bargaining provision, three of the four conservative justices were ready to issue a ruling reinstating the union law as originally passed. Prosser, on the other hand, wanted to wait longer, to avoid the appearance that the court was rushing their decision through. Prosser thought he had an agreement with liberal Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson to delay release of the opinion until Tuesday of the following week.

As Monday arrived, there was no word from Abrahamson on whether the decision would be issued the next day. At 5:30 p.m. Prosser and the other conservative justices marched around the chambers, looking for Abrahamson, who was found in Justice Bradley’s office. Prosser stood outside Bradley’s door, talking to the justices in Bradley’s office. The discussion got heated, with Prosser expressing his lack of faith in Abrahamson’s ability to lead the Court.

According to one witness, Bradley charged toward Prosser, shaking her clenched fist in his face. Another source says they were “literally nose to nose.” Prosser then put his hands up to push her away. As one source pointed out, if a man wants to push a woman who is facing him, he wouldn’t push her in the chest (unless he wants to face an entirely different criminal charge). Consequently, Prosser put his hands on Bradley’s shoulders to push her away, and in doing so, made contact with her neck.

At that moment, another justice approached Bradley from behind and pulled her away from Prosser, saying, “Stop it, Ann, this isn’t like you.” Bradley then shouted, “I was choked!” Another justice present replied, “You were not choked.” In a statement following the incident, Bradley maintained Prosser “put his hands around my neck in anger in a chokehold.”

On Monday night, Bradley called Capitol Police Chief Charles Tubbs to talk to him about the incident. On the morning of Wednesday, June 15, Tubbs joined the justices in a closed-door meeting, where he discussed “issues relating to workplace violence.”

During the meeting, Chief Justice Abrahamson actually reenacted the incident on Chief Tubbs — no doubt an amusing sight, as the diminutive Abrahamson mimicked choking the tall, portly police chief. During her demonstration, Abrahamson emphasized that Prosser had exerted “pressure” on Bradley’s throat.

“There was no pressure,” interrupted the justice who had initially broken up the incident between Bradley and Prosser. “That’s only because you broke us apart,” shot back Bradley. This exchange led several meeting attendees to believe Bradley was making up the charge, as they took her rejoinder as an admission that there was no pressure applied to her neck.

During the Wednesday meeting, Bradley urged the justices present to take a vote on whether Prosser should be forced into anger-management counseling. The threat was implicit — if they didn’t vote her way, she would be forced to “take the next step” against Prosser, which they took to mean filing a restraining order against him. The other justices balked, wondering whether they even had the authority to order Prosser into any type of counseling. Some thought it would be “demeaning” to Prosser to have to go to counseling when he had done nothing wrong. In the end, Bradley realized she didn’t have enough justices on her side and no vote was taken.

To date, Bradley has not filed any kind of charges against Prosser. Instead, the story was leaked to the George Soros–funded Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, who used three anonymous sources to back up Bradley’s story. There were six justices present at the time of the incident, four of whom would be more likely to back Prosser’s version of the story. That leaves Abrahamson and Bradley as the only two remaining justices present. One source present speculated the third source may have been Bradley’s law clerk, who likely didn’t actually see the confrontation but may have head Bradley shout “I was choked.”

Speculation is abundant as to why Bradley decided to forgo a criminal complaint against Prosser, deciding instead to go to the press ten days after the event. Some say Bradley’s complaint wouldn’t have stood up if given the scrutiny of a criminal investigation. Furthermore, others speculate that if any formal criminal proceedings had moved forward (a restraining-order filing, for instance), Prosser would be afforded evidentiary hearings, testimony, and discovery.

Furthermore, sources unanimously believed that it was Shirley Abrahamson who has been the impetus behind the story, managing the press operation from behind the scenes. Justices had been working together regularly since the incident without any signs of rancor until Abrahamson decided to make this an issue, sources believe.

While Bradley has not filed any charges against Prosser, an investigation was initiated by the Capitol Police, who then quickly turned the case over to the Dane County Sheriff, David Mahoney — who once actually appeared in a campaign ad supporting the reelection of Chief Justice Abrahamson. The ad also included not-yet-famous circuit-court judge Maryann Sumi, whose ruling the Supreme Court had to vacate in order to allow Scott Walker’s collective-bargaining bill to stand.

Sounds to me like Bradley is making stuff up. If she was assaulted she should have filed a criminal complaint, not leaked a story to a Soros-funded outlet.

[excon]

Hello again, Steve:

What a surprise... You and wrong stream media think the conservative is telling the truth..

excon

[speechlesstx]

Have charges been filed? Did the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism break the story? Are they funded by Soros?

[excon]

(1) Have charges been filed? (2) Did the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism break the story? (3) Are they funded by Soros?

Hello again, Steve:

(1) They certainly MIGHT be after the cops investigate... (2) I don't know. What difference does it make? (3) I don't know. What difference does it make??

If it's true, it's true. If it's not, it's not. I don't care who funded who. But, of course the cad assaulted the little lady, just like Thomas left the pubic hair on the coke can.

excon

[speechlesstx]

We'll see.

[tomder55]

I think Prosser should counter charge asap. Of course if common sense prevailed then it will be realised that no one was hurt from the incident .

But, of course the cad assaulted the little lady

. That's the typical prevailing opinion regardless of the facts.

I'm trying to come up with a scenario where he would've been so angry after a win to assault his opponent .

just like Thomas left the pubic hair on the coke can.

Yeah the left learned the new way to lynch very well in that case.

[speechlesstx]

Seems Walker's collective bargaining law is already reaping benefits.

Union curbs rescue a Wisconsin school district
By: Byron York | Chief Political Correspondent Follow Him @ByronYork | 06/30/11 8:05 PM

"This is a disaster," said Mark Miller, the Wisconsin Senate Democratic leader, in February after Republican Gov. Scott Walker proposed a budget bill that would curtail the collective bargaining powers of some public employees. Miller predicted catastrophe if the bill were to become law -- a charge repeated thousands of times by his fellow Democrats, union officials, and protesters in the streets.

Now the bill is law, and we have some very early evidence of how it is working. And for one beleaguered Wisconsin school district, it's a godsend, not a disaster.

The Kaukauna School District, in the Fox River Valley of Wisconsin near Appleton, has about 4,200 students and about 400 employees. It has struggled in recent times and this year faced a deficit of $400,000. But after the law went into effect, at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday, school officials put in place new policies they estimate will turn that $400,000 deficit into a $1.5 million surplus. And it's all because of the very provisions that union leaders predicted would be disastrous.

In the past, teachers and other staff at Kaukauna were required to pay 10 percent of the cost of their health insurance coverage and none of their pension costs. Now, they'll pay 12.6 percent of the cost of their coverage (still well below rates in much of the private sector) and also contribute 5.8 percent of salary to their pensions. The changes will save the school board an estimated $1.2 million this year, according to board President Todd Arnoldussen.

Of course, Wisconsin unions had offered to make benefit concessions during the budget fight. Wouldn't Kaukauna's money problems have been solved if Walker had just accepted those concessions and not demanded cutbacks in collective bargaining powers?

"The monetary part of it is not the entire issue," says Arnoldussen, a political independent who won a spot on the board in a nonpartisan election. Indeed, some of the most important improvements in Kaukauna's outlook are because of the new limits on collective bargaining.

In the past, Kaukauna's agreement with the teachers union required the school district to purchase health insurance coverage from something called WEA Trust -- a company created by the Wisconsin teachers union. "It was in the collective bargaining agreement that we could only negotiate with them," says Arnoldussen. "Well, you know what happens when you can only negotiate with one vendor." This year, WEA Trust told Kaukauna that it would face a significant increase in premiums.

Now, the collective bargaining agreement is gone, and the school district is free to shop around for coverage. And all of a sudden, WEA Trust has changed its position. "With these changes, the schools could go out for bids, and lo and behold, WEA Trust said, 'We can match the lowest bid,'" says Republican state Rep. Jim Steineke, who represents the area and supports the Walker changes. At least for the moment, Kaukauna is staying with WEA Trust, but saving substantial amounts of money.

Then there are work rules. "In the collective bargaining agreement, high school teachers only had to teach five periods a day, out of seven," says Arnoldussen. "Now, they're going to teach six." In addition, the collective bargaining agreement specified that teachers had to be in the school 37 1/2 hours a week. Now, it will be 40 hours.

The changes mean Kaukauna can reduce the size of its classes -- from 31 students to 26 students in high school and from 26 students to 23 students in elementary school. In addition, there will be more teacher time for one-on-one sessions with troubled students. Those changes would not have been possible without the much-maligned changes in collective bargaining.

Teachers' salaries will stay "relatively the same," Arnoldussen says, except for higher pension and health care payments. (The top salary is around $80,000 per year, with about $35,000 in additional benefits, for 184 days of work per year -- summers off.) Finally, the money saved will be used to hire a few more teachers and institute merit pay.

It is impossible to overstate how bitter and ugly the Wisconsin fight has been, and that bitterness and ugliness continues to this day with efforts to recall senators and an unseemly battle inside the state Supreme Court. But the new law is now a reality, and Gov. Walker recently told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the measure will gain acceptance "with every day, week and month that goes by that the world doesn't fall apart."

In the Kaukauna schools, the world is not only not falling apart -- it's getting better.

Funny how a little common sense and competition can make things better all the way around.

[excon]

Funny how a little common sense and competition can make things better all the way around.

Hello again, Steve:

We'll see, won't we?

From MY perspective, it's not so much WHAT happened, but HOW it happened... And, I think HOW it happened will destroy ANY good that COULD come from WHAT happened, IF there's any good to be had...

First off, Walker didn't campaign on what he DID. He SPRUNG it on the voters... He played a hoax on 'em, and they didn't like it so much. You wouldn't like it either... So, no matter WHAT Walker does, or how good it MIGHT be, the electorate feels duped, because they WERE duped... This was FORCED upon them with NO notice. Nobody likes that. So, I think the voters are going to CHANGE it back, and that won't make things better at all.

Secondly, Walkers eyes are too close together.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Oh, so when it came to Obamacare being rammed through against the will of the people that was OK. So, I'll be waiting for you to tell the people of Wisconsin to shut up and take their medicine.

[excon]

Oh, so when it came to Obamacare being rammed through against the will of the people that was OK.

Hello again, Steve:

You saw ramming where I saw the WILL of the people being carried out. Obama campaigned on health care reform... It wasn't a surprise.

Walker didn't do that, so I don't know if it was the will of the people or not. You don't either, since it was SNUCK in. The people DIDN'T have a chance to EXPRESS their WILL.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Poll Finds Voters Against Obamacare, as Trust in Democrats Drops

New CNN Poll: 59% Oppose Obamacare

Health care law too costly, most say

Nearly two-thirds of Americans say the health care overhaul signed into law last week costs too much and expands the government's role in health care too far, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, underscoring an uphill selling job ahead for President Obama and congressional Democrats.

Poll: Most Americans Remain Against Health Care Overhaul

I didn't see the will of the people wanting Obamacare in there anywhere.

[tomder55]

Andrew Cuomo is a union buster too.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/23/ny...er=rss&emc=rss
There was some talk by the left of this before the election , and the dinosaur media of course has been outraged.
The Slimes said :
..the unions should make their voices heard and push back hard against this misguided plan

Oh wait... that's what they said about Walker . The media and the left has largely given Cuomo a pass.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/18/opinion/18fri1.html

[talaniman]

We will see when the dust settles as it sounds good now, but the ink ain't quite dry enough to say it helps the state yet, or if people will be pleased with the results. Unlike Obamacare which has already delivered results, and those who say it costs too much are not backed by facts.

The facts aren't in yet in Wisconsin. But they will be.

[speechlesstx]

Unlike Obamacare which has already delivered results

What results would those be?

[talaniman]

http://dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill46.pdf

No termination or rejection for pre existing conditions

Extending the age you can carry a child on your own insurance

Closing the donut hole for seniors

Reduce prescription drug costs for seniors by 50%

Free preventative care visits

Investment in Community Health Centers to provide the funding needed to expand access to
health care in communities where it is needed most. This $10 billion investment begins in
2010 and extends for five years.

Establish standards for insurance overhead and require public disclosure to ensure that enrollees get value for their premium dollars, requiring plans in the individual and small group market to spend 80 percent of premium dollars on clinical services and quality activities, and 85 percent for plans in the large group market. Health insurance plans that do not meet these thresholds will provide rebates to their policyholders. This provision takes effect in 2011 and applies to all plans, including grandfathered plans, with the exception of self-insured plans.

No Lifetime Limits on Coverage
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will prohibit insurers from imposing lifetime limits on benefits. This provision takes effect six months after enactment and applies to all new plans.

No Restricted Annual Limits on Coverage
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will tightly restrict insurance companies' use of annual limits to ensure access to needed care, effective six months after enactment for all new health plans. These tight restrictions will be defined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. When the Exchanges are operational, the use of annual limits will be banned.

Tired of typing but let me know which of these benefits you would like repealed, and how this is not a good thing. What do you think your republican buddies will put into place after they repeal OBAMA CARE?? Oh that's right, Paul Ryan has a better plan doesn't he.

[speechlesstx]

Um, those may be provisions of Obamacare but that's not quite the same thing as results. Since the majority of the legislation has not been implemented it's hard to determine any results.